John Duffy

Allegation / charges

In the matter of John Duffy, a solicitor formerly practising as John Duffy & Co, Solicitors, at Main Street, Monasterevin, Co Kildare, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2008 [7660/DT01/09 and High Court record 2009 no 87 SA] Law Society of Ireland (applicant) John Duffy (respondent solicitor) On 17 June 2009, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in his practice as a solicitor in that he: a) Falsely represented by letter dated 19 February 2007 that a deposit of €7 million had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client, b) Falsely represented by letter dated 19 February 2007 that a deposit of €7 million had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client and in circumstances where that letter was furnished as security to a named third-party financial institution in order to secure a loan for a named limited liability company in the sum of €8.825 million, c) Falsely represented to a named third-party financial institution by email dated 19 July 2007 that he had served a notice on a named client threatening to forfeit the deposit if the sale was not closed by return in circumstances where he had not served such a notice, d) Falsely represented, by implication, to a named third-party financial institution by email dated 19 July 2007 that he continued to hold a deposit in the sum of €7 million that had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client, e) Falsely represented, by implication, to a named third-party financial institution by email dated 7 November 2007 that he continued to hold a deposit in the sum of €7 million that had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client, f) Falsely represented to a named firm of solicitors, solicitors for a named third-party financial institution, by letter dated 13 November 2007, that he continued to hold a deposit in the sum of €7 million that had been paid on behalf of a named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where no such sum was in fact paid by the named client, g) Falsely represented to another named firm of solicitors, solicitors for the receiver, by telephone conversation dated 31 January 2008, that he continued to hold a deposit in the sum of €7 million in his client account, which had been paid on behalf of the same named client to the respondent solicitor to act as a deposit for the sale of the shares in a named limited liability company to the above-mentioned named client in circumstances where he did not hold such funds. The tribunal directed that: i) The respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors’ profession, ii) The name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors, iii) The respondent solicitor pay the whole of the costs of the Law Society of Ireland, including witnesses’ expenses, to be taxed in default of agreement. The tribunal directed that the matter be referred forward to the High Court and, on 12 October 2009, the President of the High Court ordered: 1) That the respondent solicitor is not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors’ profession, 2) That the name of the respondent solicitor shall be struck from the Roll of Solicitors, 3) That the Law Society do recover the costs of the proceedings herein and the costs of the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal to include witness expenses as against the respondent when taxed or ascertained.

Duties engaged

• No improper use of client money

Documents

No documents recorded.